Observations made at more than two dozen Apple retail stores over the last few weeks show Apple to be maintaining healthy sales of Macs and iPhones that aren't far off from rates seen during the lead-in to last year's holiday shopping season.

The findings are the latest to suggest the Cupertino-based Mac and electronics maker remains better positioned than most to weather the brunt of an ongoing economic crunch that has seen consumers rein in their budgets and put novelty and non-critical purchases on hold for a brighter day.

During the tail end of March and early April, Piper Jaffray analyst Gene Munster and five members of his research team spent 25 hours in Apple retail stores across the country counting how many Macs, iPhones and iPods left the stores in customers' hands. The mix of stores included 7 flagship locations and 18 averaged-sized stores, each of which were surveyed on various days of the week at random times.

Using a weighted average calculation that assumes 8 percent of Apple's retail stores are flagship locations, with the remaining 92 percent being regular stores, Munster concluded that company is currently selling an average of 22 iPhone 3Gs, 28 Macs, and approximately 50 iPods per day through its U.S. retail locations.

For Macs, this compares to an average of 36 Macs per store during the analyst's most recent checks in November 2008 and sales of 20 Macs per store witnessed during a similar survey back in September of 2007. Apple ultimately went on to report sales of 2.52 million Macs during the November 2008 quarter and 2.16 million Macs during the September 2007 quarter, leading Munster to estimate that the company sold about 2.2 million Macs during the recently-ended March quarter.

"We also note that the Street is looking for about 2.1 million Mac units in the March quarter, so our checks imply upside to the Street Mac units as well," he wrote in a report obtained by AppleInsider. "The solid Mac number is likely due to the newly released Mac desktops [announced on March 3rd]."

Meanwhile, sales of 22 iPhones per stores is down from 28 iPhones per store during November, which suggests a 21 percent decline in sales sequentially compared to the Street's view of a 24 percent drop. However, Munster is betting that expanded international availability will help offset some of these domestic declines and is therefore modeling iPhone sales for the March quarter to be relatively flat at 4.4 million units.

"And regardless, our checks are not showing the magnitude of sequential declines the Street is anticipating in March," he added. "In other words, we continue to expect upside to Street iPhone numbers in the March quarter."

For the first time in the history of its Apple store surveys, Piper Jaffray also counted daily iPod sales but didn't report on its findings in detail due to a lack of comparative data from previous rounds of checks, saying only that sales of the digital media players were "slightly more than twice" the volume of iPhone 3G sales.

"This provides a rough guide for iPod units in the quarter, and we believe the iPod number should be in-line with Street estimates of ~10 million units, helped by the [March 11th] launch of the iPod shuffle," Munster wrote.

I actually like reading Gene Munster stuff because I'm long on aapl. But I constantly wonder if these surveys mean anything, nothing, or just a little bit less than nothing. Munster's iPod esitmates have been as far off as other analysts in the past. Makes me wonder who pays for his little field trips and half-baked surveys.

I, for one, would rather have a "half-baked" survey then no data at all.
I appreciate that Gene actually does some real research instead of just getting smoke blown up his butt by management.

I, for one, would rather have a "half-baked" survey then no data at all.
I appreciate that Gene actually does some real research instead of just getting smoke blown up his butt by management.

But as a marketing guy you've studied statistical analysis and know how difficult it is to reduce the margin of error, even with a large sample. There are so many variables in his methods that it's really hard to give it much credence. I agree, it's good that he tries - and it's a number we didn't have otherwise. But it really doesn't mean much.

You said REAL research - and I'm not sure this is REAL research.

@DeaPeaJay - I bet Gene was excited about the Apple ban on plastic bags.

I have always seen people walking out with new Macs whenever I visit an Apple Store, any time of the year. I rarely see anyone buy a computer at Best Buy. Best Buy purchases are typically electronics, games, movies, and then music and computer accessories. Rarely saw any computer sales at Circuit City, when they were still open. Perhaps more PC's are bought online.

I actually like reading Gene Munster stuff because I'm long on aapl. But I constantly wonder if these surveys mean anything, nothing, or just a little bit less than nothing.

Munster's iPod esitmates have been as far off as other analysts in the past. Makes me wonder who pays for his little field trips and half-baked surveys.

Yeah. It is intertaining to see what he comes up with, but in terms of useable data? Not much. He takes a tiny sample of a non-representative source. That is bad enough, but then he tries to compare it to different quarters. He is not even going for year to year comparisons.

So the fact that he goes to the stores and counts actual sales (I will give the benefit of the doubt as to whether or not this is even done accurately) so it is one step above anecdotal.

I wouldn't want to be the guy using his numbers to make my investing decisions, though...

I actually like reading Gene Munster stuff because I'm long on aapl. But I constantly wonder if these surveys mean anything, nothing, or just a little bit less than nothing.

Munster's iPod esitmates have been as far off as other analysts in the past. Makes me wonder who pays for his little field trips and half-baked surveys.

They've been off by about plus or minus 5%. That's pretty good for this sort of thing. They have to correlate data from these surveys and relate them to the final results. After a while, it begins to make sense.

Otherwise, there is NO information we can look at.

It was easier before Apple had more large dealers the way they do now, and major sales through the internet.

Hi Walsh,
Gene's on-site examination of Apple product sales is helpful at least because it seems to confirm that Apple's performance is likely not making wild swings one way or the other, while being the only examination out there that offers first hand analysis. This is good. Naturally, prudent investors and readers interested in Apple's performance need to combine his findings with data from other sources, instead of relying upon his data exclusively.

Am I alone in thinking "only 28 Macs a day" is pretty low given a store's running costs? I guess the 50 iPods (is that all?) help.

Have you ever been in an Apple store?

They sell a lot of things. Every time I go to one, there are long lines at the counters. If the average computer costs, say, $1,800, and they're selling 28, that's over $54,000 a day, on average. 22 iPhones would be an average of $5,500. 50 iPods could average another $7,500 at about $150 apiece. Add in thousands more for software, printers, iPod and iPhone accessories, some of which cost in the hundreds, plus cables, harddrives, networking products, etc, and that average could approach $75,000 a day, or more. Figure that for 6 days a week, and that's $450,000 a week, times 300, say, for days off and holidays, and you get about $22,500,000 average per store.

They sell a lot of things. Every time I go to one, there are long lines at the counters. If the average computer costs, say, $1,800, and they're selling 28, that's over $54,000 a day, on average. 22 iPhones would be an average of $5,500. 50 iPods could average another $7,500 at about $150 apiece. Add in thousands more for software, printers, iPod and iPhone accessories, some of which cost in the hundreds, plus cables, harddrives, networking products, etc, and that average could approach $75,000 a day, or more. Figure that for 6 days a week, and that's $450,000 a week, times 300, say, for days off and holidays, and you get about $22,500,000 average per store.

How do you figure that to be low?

My understanding is that the Apple Store has the best revenue per square foot in retail.

Figure that for 6 days a week, and that's $450,000 a week, times 300, say, for days off and holidays, and you get about $22,500,000 average per store.

How do you figure that to be low?

Just to clarify - your numbers worked out correctly, but you said you were multiplying the weekly gross by 300. In fact you multiplied the daily gross by 300, which was correct, and the number you got ($22M per year) is correct.

Just to clarify - your numbers worked out correctly, but you said you were multiplying the weekly gross by 300. In fact you multiplied the daily gross by 300, which was correct, and the number you got ($22M per year) is correct.

Yeah, it looked like that. but, of course, I meant the daily gross times 300. I should have rewritten it, but when I noticed that error, it was posted for too long for no one to not to have already read it. I figured people would know what I meant.

Yeah, they're full of kids on all the computers, and at the time they had one single mac mini in the store (london regents street) and I was with a friend who wanted to look at one.

I'm not dissing the sales figures, just that when it's broken down to a Macs sold per day, per store figure, 28 just seems a small figure. Then again given that PC World survives on Tottenham Court Road nearby and is empty all the time, it seems you don't need a lot of revenue to keep a store open, even in prime areas.

That's well-put. Consumer sentiment is about as much as you could hope to glean from these methods. But basing totals for the quarter on mall spying? In any way shape or form? I don't think so.

When Gene has enough of these surveys stacked up he'll be able to compare them to one another, which will mean something. I don't remember when he started doing it or if he does it every quarter.

He's been doing this for a number of years.

His long term predictions for stock price and profits have been about as good as it gets, even though short term, things don't always work out as accurately.

I remember way back, when he predicted that Apple's stock would go to $50, when it was a bit over $20. Then he said $100, when it was just over $40.

He said it would split, and it did. He shortly afterwards said $200, and it hit that.

He's been aggressive, but except for general market conditions, or really unexpected situations, which is not in these guy's purview, he's been pretty good. For example, when Apple's stock hit $86, and declined to $50 over the year, that was unexpected, because no one expected Apple to not come out with new iPods for over 10 months. He also didn't predict this present economic debacle starting early last year. He's not an economist, though they didn't get it right either. If we didn't have this problem, Apple's stock COULD have been over $300, as he had said it would be before now.

Yeah, they're full of kids on all the computers, and at the time they had one single mac mini in the store (london regents street) and I was with a friend who wanted to look at one.

I'm not dissing the sales figures, just that when it's broken down to a Macs sold per day, per store figure, 28 just seems a small figure. Then again given that PC World survives on Tottenham Court Road nearby and is empty all the time, it seems you don't need a lot of revenue to keep a store open, even in prime areas.

28 computers, average, per day, per store isn't a small number. Apple has at least 225 stores in the US, and I don't know how those numbers correlate with non US stores. But that would be 28 times 225, which is 6,300 computers per day. The total of Apple's store sales around the world is much less than half of apple's computer sales, I don't remember if the number is 15 or 20%, but we can calculate from what we know the sales to be in toto, and figure it out. If the average store is open 6 days, as they are here, or even seven in some markets, then that's 37,800 computers a week, or 1,890,000 for a 50 week year. Those would be the US only numbers.

15% would give about 12,606,300 per year total, and 20% would give 9,450,000, so those numbers seem alright. Again, that's only including the US stores. So, including the foreign ones in, 20% might come close.
I think the online store sells about 40% of the total.

28 computers, average, per day, per store isn't a small number. Apple has at least 225 stores in the US, and I don't know how those numbers correlate with non US stores. But that would be 28 times 225, which is 6,300 computers per day. The total of Apple's store sales around the world is much less than half of apple's computer sales, I don't remember if the number is 15 or 20%, but we can calculate from what we know the sales to be in toto, and figure it out. If the average store is open 6 days, as they are here, or even seven in some markets, then that's 37,800 computers a week, or 1,890,000 for a 50 week year. Those would be the US only numbers.

15% would give about 12,606,300 per year total, and 20% would give 9,450,000, so those numbers seem alright. Again, that's only including the US stores. So, including the foreign ones in, 20% might come close.
I think the online store sells about 40% of the total.

FYI: "with an average of 249 stores and 201 stores open during the first quarters of 2009 and 2008, respectively, average revenue per store declined to $7.0 million for the first quarter of 2009 from $8.5 million in the first quarter of 2008.http://media.corporate-ir.net/media_...10Q_Q1FY09.pdf

They are selling all those Mac cause Microsoft are now putting Apple in their ads. They are showing those Mac notebooks briefly and people are like: "Wow, they look sexy. I must check out the Apple store."

FYI: "with an average of 249 stores and 201 stores open during the first quarters of 2009 and 2008, respectively, average revenue per store declined to $7.0 million for the first quarter of 2009 from $8.5 million in the first quarter of 2008.http://media.corporate-ir.net/media_...10Q_Q1FY09.pdf

That number is different because it doesn't really take into account the mega stores here in NYC, which are estimated to do over $150 million.

So depending on how you weight the numbers, you will come up with different answers. But my math is correct, no matter how you look at it.